User talk:Ahnoneemoos/Archives/2012/August


Proposed deletion of Elliott Castro

The article Elliott Castro has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Electric Catfish 15:36, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Elliot Castro

You have 10 days to fix this issue, so there is no rush. You can use spanish language sources and offline sources if necessary. If you are unsure how to add these, look at how to cite using the editing toolbar. -- Mrmatiko (talk) 17:10, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Mrmatiko ius right, there are some minor issues with the stub. I did some minor stuff related to the format which I think will help for now. I suggest that you expand the article a little more and post some extra sources. The important question that we must ask ourselves is, is he truly notable or is he "one amongst many"? I see that he has contirbuted many sports related articles for "Claridad". You many want to create a "section" titled "Sports articles by Castro" in the article and cite where they are written in Claridad as the reference sources. Tony the Marine (talk) 22:43, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
You are also edit-warring over the BLP-PROD tags. I advise you to stop, as it can lead to a block. Electric Catfish 21:08, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

August 2012

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Electric Catfish 21:05, 14 August 2012 (UTC)